Ward Labs Mineral Analysis profiles for a few NE breweries (and Taras Bulba)

[skibb]

Found this old spreadsheet a friend compiled and shared with me (with his permission I am sharing it here). Most of these date around 2019/2020 - hopefully some of you will find this helpful (as I did!)

Sample ID	pH	TDS Est	EC	Cations	Anions	Sodium	Calcium	Magnesium	Potassium	Total P	Nitrate (NO3)	S - Sulfate	Sulfate	Chloride	CO3	HCO3	Total Alkalinity (CaCO3)	Total Hardness (CaCO3)	Total Fe
Hill Farmstead Everett Porter	4.5	1839	3.07	53.6	31.5	128	55	150	1277	399	4.8	143	429	740	< 1.0	63	52	763	0.14
Hill Farmstead Dorothy dry-hop saison	3.9	1934	3.22	42.1	14.1	107	63	162	809	361	7.2	111	333	234	< 1.0	< 1	< 1	833	< 0.01
Hudson Valley Mirrior Shield	3.5	1966	3.28	45.6	22.7	35	87	169	1004	389.3	3.3	101	303	568	< 1.0	< 1	< 1	922	0.21
Aslin BreweryMind the Hop	4.6	2020	3.37	54.7	27.4	22	118	181	1275	315.8	18.9	146	438	554	< 1.0	70	57	1049	< 1.0
Heady Topper	4.3	1584	2.64	36.6	20.6	25	110	113	802	278	17.6	156	468	339	< 1.0	< 1	< 1	746	0.37
Hill Farmstead Soiceity & Solitude	4.7	2064	3.44	49	27.4	90	83	189	984	NA	20.3	133	399	430	< 1.0	327	268	995	NA
Hill Farmstead Mary plisner	4.6	1441	2.4	33.8	12.9	89	77	119	630	NA	3.7	115	345	162	< 1.0	48	39	688	NA
Treehouse DIPA Haze	4.5	1816	3.03	44.1	20.8	48	42	142	1095	386.6	11.7	132	396	367	< 1.0	75	62	697	0.06
Trillium Melcher st Double dry hop IPA	4.6	2029	3.38	51.5	22.3	61	79	160	1232	323.3	21	167	501	264	< 1.0	172	141	864	0.07
Other half X Equillibrium: Einstiens daydream	4.4	1937	3.23	50	24.4	36	106	179	1102	341	8.5	133	399	546	< 1.0	< 1	< 1	1011	0.13

 

[skibb]

Shelton Bros De le Senne Taras Bulba

4.4

1333

2.22

30.1

12.3

20

73

103

663

202.9

12.9

91

273

183

< 1.0

28

23

612

< 0.01

 

[Clyde McCoy]

very nice, thanks for sharing. looks like there might be some NaCl in those Hill Farmstead beers

 

[mabrungard]

Those aren’t water proflies. They are useless for planing NEIPA water adjustments.

 

[IslandLizard]

I was wondering if these are perhaps analyzed beer samples? pH seems to be in beer range.

 

[skibb]

Those aren’t water proflies. They are useless for planing NEIPA water adjustments.

Correct - these are analysis of finished beers. To look at these numbers, it gives you an idea of what water profile adjustments they are doing for their beer/styles.
Sorry, labelling it as 'Water profiles' was probably a poor way of titling it.

 

[cire]

Yes, those values are typical analyses of finished beer.
Phosphorus (P) should be shown as phosphate (PO4), and improve ion balance.

 

[IslandLizard]

Sorry, labelling it as 'Water profiles' was probably a poor way of titling it.

We can change the thread title for you, to make it clearer. Something like this?

Ward Labs Beer Mineral Analysis for a few NE breweries (and Taras Bulba)​

Or something else?
Let me know.

 

[Dgallo]

Correct - these are analysis of finished beers. To look at these numbers, it gives you an idea of what water profile adjustments they are doing for their beer/styles.
Sorry, labelling it as 'Water profiles' was probably a poor way of titling it.

Unfortunately this serves very little purpose for brewing and doesn’t provide any incite to adjustments. Grains provide much of the minerals in these analysis and there is no consistency of the amount you gain from the grains as it’s dependent on region, growth year, farmers fertilization and other variables. It’s definitely interesting to see but provides zero assistance in knowing any of those beers water profile

 

[skibb]

Unfortunately this serves very little purpose for brewing and doesn’t provide any incite to adjustments. Grains provide much of the minerals in these analysis and there is no consistency of the amount you gain from the grains as it’s dependent on region, growth year, farmers fertilization and other variables. It’s definitely interesting to see but provides zero assistance in knowing any of those beers water profile

I would argue it is helpful information (like seeing NaCl in HFS beers and seeing such a high amount of chloride in Everett), especially if you are getting your beers analyzed and can compare numbers.

 

[Dgallo]

I would argue it is helpful information (like seeing NaCl in HFS beers and seeing such a high amount of chloride in Everett), especially if you are getting your beers analyzed and can compare numbers.

Well they are working off a well, being in the NE it’s most likely hard and high in Ca. It’s very likely they use Nacl to adjust their chloride without upping their Ca. But again high Cl in modern beers is already a very well know adjustment. It’s not as important what people are adjusting with, as that’s dependent of base water. Their target of key ions is what would be more important if you’re trying to replicate their beers or be in the ball park of what they do.

 

[VikeMan]

I would argue it is helpful information (like seeing NaCl in HFS beers and seeing such a high amount of chloride in Everett), especially if you are getting your beers analyzed and can compare numbers.

Well, if you could be sure that you're replicating every other part of the recipe and process, so that the only variable is the water, I suppose it could be useful.

But if you can't do that, the numbers would be pretty useless, because those high numbers are not representative of ions dissolved in the beer. They are (mostly) the result of the testing process, which uses a hot plasma to ionize elements in the sample that would normally be locked up in (malt/hop derived) compounds. And it's a good thing, too. Most of those magnesium values, if present as dissolved ions of magnesium salts, would give you the runs.

 

[skibb]

If you get your beer tested at the same lab by the same means you can compare and adjust, retest, see what changed, adjust, etc.

I have found data like this, and of my beers I've tested, helpful in deciding where to add my salt additions, and which salts to add.

 

[VikeMan]

If you get your beer tested at the same lab by the same means you can compare and adjust, retest, see what changed, adjust, etc.

I have found data like this, and of my beers I've tested, helpful in deciding where to add my salt additions, and which salts to add.

Again, if you can gaurantee exactly the same contributions from the malt and hops, it could be useful, because you'd only have one remaining variable to discover. Otherwise, no. In other words, you can't substitute malt/hop derived compound bound elements for dissolved ions or vice versa. But the test doesn't distinguish between the two. In other other words, the Totals don't matter.

 

[skibb]

Again, if you can gaurantee exactly the same contributions from the malt and hops, it could be useful, because you'd only have one remaining variable to discover. Otherwise, no. In other words, you can't substitute malt/hop derived compound bound elements for dissolved ions or vice versa. But the test doesn't distinguish between the two. In other other words, the Totals don't matter.

I am not trying to clone or mimic any of these beers water profiles - I am not sure why you think that is the case.

This is simply data I can match against my own beer's results with, compare with tasting notes, and see how they contrast.

For example, early on I was adding CaCl to both my mash and kettle - and my beers were noticeably higher in calcium than some of my favorite commercial hazies. This lead me to just adding it all in the mash (and swapping out my lactic acid for phosphoric), which in turn brought my calcium levels down and more in line with what I was seeing with other commercial hazies. It also improved my flavor by eliminating what I sometimes perceived as a subtle chalkiness that occurred every so often in my beers.

 

[VikeMan]

I am not trying to clone or mimic any of these beers water profiles - I am not sure why you think that is the case.

Ok, I guess I'm confused. You said you found it useful in helping in deciding where to add salt additions, and which salts to add. How does it do that, given that it doesn't tell you how much of any given ion is actually dissolved in the beer?

 

[mabrungard]

The elemental contributions from the grain are several orders of magnitude greater than what the water provides. In addition, much of that content is entrained in complex molecules that are 'ripped' apart during the laboratory analysis. The typical analysis uses either inductively-coupled plasma or mass-spectrometer methods that 'burn' the sample and its spectra indicate how much of an element is present.

Like I said, these results are useless.

PS: The presence of elements in the complex molecules in wort is VERY different than the presence of free ions in water. For example, malt provides ALL the Calcium and Magnesium that yeast need for their metabolism and brewing water does not HAVE to have any of those ions to create a successful brew. But there are other reasons to add typical water ions to our brewing water to create an even better beer.

 

[AlexKay]

PS: The presence of elements in the complex molecules in wort is VERY different than the presence of free ions in water. For example, malt provides ALL the Calcium and Magnesium that yeast need for their metabolism and brewing water does not HAVE to have any of those ions to create a successful brew. But there are other reasons to add typical water ions to our brewing water to create an even better beer.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but I've been told by several people who should know (as well as John Palmer's book) that calcium is the exception to this: that mash pH, alpha-amylase stability, and oxalate precipitation (and maybe other considerations) all depend on additional calcium being provided in brewing water, to the level of 50-100 ppm.

 

[mabrungard]

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but I've been told by several people who should know (as well as John Palmer's book) that calcium is the exception to this: that mash pH, alpha-amylase stability, and oxalate precipitation (and maybe other considerations) all depend on additional calcium being provided in brewing water, to the level of 50-100 ppm.

Nope. Not totally true at all. But those are good reasons why your mashing water should have some calcium in it.

Ale brewing should almost always employ water with that range of calcium since it aids flocculation and beer clarification. But that phenomena is not necessary or desirable when brewing many lagers. Lager yeasts can flocculate too early if there is too much calcium in the water.

I use a technique where I boost only the mashing water calcium content to 40 ppm to get the benefits cited above, and then I dilute the overall calcium content when I sparge with pure RO water. That leaves the beer’s overall calcium content down around 20 ppm where many lager yeasts prefer.